Quashed

Jahaara Hamid Shiakh and Others v. Divisional Controller Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Division Jalgaon

Bombay HC12 Jul 2021WP/4233/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court quashed an order dismissing a reference on the ground that the cause of action had not survived. Relying on Rameshwar Manjhi, it held that while legal heirs cannot seek reinstatement, they can avail benefits arising from setting aside the deceased employee's termination. The application was remanded to the Labour Court.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order quashed and set aside; application remanded to Labour Court Jalgaon for disposal on merits within three months.

Jahaara Hamid Shiakh and Others Vs Divisional… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

wp423319.odt

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.4233 OF 2019

¶5

Jahaara Hamid Shaikh and others

¶6

Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

Divisional Controller, Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Division, Jalgaon, Tq. & District Jalgaon. Respondent

¶9

Mr.Satish S. Manale, advocate for the petitioners Mr. M.K.Goyanka, advocate for the Respondent.

¶10

CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.

¶11

DATE : 12^th July, 2021.

¶12

PC :

¶13

1 Heard Mr.Manale, learned Counsel for the petitioner

¶14

and Mr.Goyanka, learned Counsel for the respondent.

¶15

2 The application for restoration of Reference IDA No.64

¶16

of 2009, fled by Hamid Shaikh, which came to be dismissed on 02.02.2011, has been fled by his legal heirs. The same has been dismissed on the sole ground that the cause of action would not

¶17

survive.

¶18

{2} wp423319.odt

¶19

3 It is material to note that the parties are ad idem that deceased Hamid Shaikh was terminated from service and not suspended and, therefore, IDA No.64 of 2009, challenged the termination and not the suspension, as incorrectly mentioned in the impugned order. It is material to note, that insofar as the plea of reinstatement is concerned, on setting aside of termination, the same can not be pursued by the legal heirs. However, the benefts arising out of the setting aside of termination, can defnitely be availed by them. To this limited extent, the legal heirs have a right.

¶20

4 This position is enunciated by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Rameshwar Manjhi (deceased) through his son Lakhiram Manjhi Vs. Management of Sangramgarh Colliery; 1994 (1) SCC 292.

¶21

5 In that view of the matter, the impugned order cannot be sustained. The same is, therefore, quashed and set aside. The parties shall appear before the learned Labour Court, Jalgaon, on 09^th August, 2021, who shall, thereupon, proceed to consider the application and decide it on merits, being mindful of the judgment in Rameshwar Manjhi (supra) and Section 10 (8) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The said application shall be decided within a period

¶22

wp423319.odt

¶23

{3}

¶24

of three months from the date of parties putting their appearance, as directed above.

¶25

6 Writ Petition is disposed of in above terms. There shall

¶26

be no order as to costs.

¶27

(AVINASH G. GHAROTE) JUDGE